1. Rolling up a strip of paper made the supports very dense. We also learned that rolling paper up was the strongest in seventh grade. 2. It failed because no matter how strong we make the supports, paper can only hild up so much. Balance also affected because the textbooks started leaning one way. All supports failed at the same time. 3. -If we stacked the textbooks properly and put the bigger ones at the bottom. -If we had more material or thicker paper. 4. You have to space the supports out more precisely. The edges of the paper also strted to get crushed before the structure fell down.
We made paper cubes to support the textbooks because we created these cubes in physics And thought it would be a good idea to use them here. Karl's cube was far superior to david' s cube because it was more carefully constructed. We could have improved our design by making more mini cubes And arranged them more strategically. We noticed that the cube idea was horrible from the start. -- david And Karl
1. We tested a few designs and the idea of using tightly rolled paper seemed to work the vest. We also tried to create slits in the paper so we could fold it in a way that it would not unroll but that did not work. Our first design however was to create triangular shaped supports however they did not hold much weight. 2. Our supports failed because first of all we place too many books on at one time and they could not support the weight. In addition not all of our supports were the same height so the weight was not equally distributed and thus the supports collapsed. 3. To improve our design we could have had the supports all cut to the same length and had the paper rolled tighter so they would be stronger. Also if we could have used tape to hold the rolls together they may have held longer. 4. One thing we noticed was that our supports were not evenly spaced so some areas of the grouping of supports would have had more weight on them. Kishan Jeffery Pranav Akash Matt
1. We chose to build multiple circular supports, resembling pillars. This was one of the really realistic ideas which came to our head with the limited time we had, forcing us to rush to fin the most likely possible way at success, which seemed to be this design. We also folded the edges of the pillars inward to strengthen the outer edges of the paper which would be pused up against the lower(desk), and upper (textbook) surface. We did this because two papers against each other is much stronger than one shred of paper. 2. Our structure fell because our pillars were not equivalent in size, having been cut incorrectly. Since they were not correctly the weight of the textbooks was not equally balanced, eventually leading for the weight to collapse one of the 5 pillars and causing a domino effect, collapsing the entire structure. To fix this we could have used different tools like the ruler, etc. to have cut equal size pillars. 3. to better our structure we could have created more supports, which in this case the more supports the less likely the structure would be to collapse. A better central support would have also been a positive, allowing for most of the weight to focus in one spot with the other pillars aiding the central pillar. To do all this we could have used more paper, and tape to strengthen the pillars. 4. The techniques which people used in stacking the books varied, and it would be interesting to see if there is a certain technique which would be the best.
1.We were playing around with the paper and came across the idea of folding the paper several times down the page letter style and then folding those pages into even folds again down the short side. We continued forth with this idea because at the time we believed that it was the best way to support the books. 2.Our supports failed because we had uneven fold and one side of our design was weaker than the other. This is because the folds on that side were not at tight as the other side's. All of out designs failed once 6 textbooks were on top of them. 3.We could have improved our design by having several smaller supports similar to our larger one rather than the one alone. This would have distributed the weight from the textbooks more evenly and they wouldn't tip from side to side. 4.Yes, we observed that the more folds we made in an accordion style the stronger the design was. Also that when the books crushed the design, the design fell to a side and flattened rather than being crushed as a whole.
Krupa Patel, Mike Dolan, Bernard Lee, Steven Brower
1) we chose to make our support folded rectangle because we thought that the folds would make the paper stronger.
2) This support failed because it didn't have enough points of contact with the text book.
3) We could have improved our design by making more folds in the paper.
4) We noticed that the more points that the supports made cpntact with the textbook the more the weight would be distributed, making the supports stronger.
1. Rolling up a strip of paper made the supports very dense. We also learned that rolling paper up was the strongest in seventh grade.
ReplyDelete2. It failed because no matter how strong we make the supports, paper can only hild up so much. Balance also affected because the textbooks started leaning one way. All supports failed at the same time.
3. -If we stacked the textbooks properly and put the bigger ones at the bottom.
-If we had more material or thicker paper.
4. You have to space the supports out more precisely. The edges of the paper also strted to get crushed before the structure fell down.
Daniel, Jenny, Monica, and Young
We made paper cubes to support the textbooks because we created these cubes in physics And thought it would be a good idea to use them here. Karl's cube was far superior to david' s cube because it was more carefully constructed. We could have improved our design by making more mini cubes And arranged them more strategically. We noticed that the cube idea was horrible from the start. -- david And Karl
ReplyDelete1. We tested a few designs and the idea of using tightly rolled paper seemed to work the vest. We also tried to create slits in the paper so we could fold it in a way that it would not unroll but that did not work. Our first design however was to create triangular shaped supports however they did not hold much weight.
ReplyDelete2. Our supports failed because first of all we place too many books on at one time and they could not support the weight. In addition not all of our supports were the same height so the weight was not equally distributed and thus the supports collapsed.
3. To improve our design we could have had the supports all cut to the same length and had the paper rolled tighter so they would be stronger. Also if we could have used tape to hold the rolls together they may have held longer.
4. One thing we noticed was that our supports were not evenly spaced so some areas of the grouping of supports would have had more weight on them.
Kishan Jeffery Pranav Akash Matt
1. We chose to build multiple circular supports, resembling pillars. This was one of the really realistic ideas which came to our head with the limited time we had, forcing us to rush to fin the most likely possible way at success, which seemed to be this design. We also folded the edges of the pillars inward to strengthen the outer edges of the paper which would be pused up against the lower(desk), and upper (textbook) surface. We did this because two papers against each other is much stronger than one shred of paper.
ReplyDelete2. Our structure fell because our pillars were not equivalent in size, having been cut incorrectly. Since they were not correctly the weight of the textbooks was not equally balanced, eventually leading for the weight to collapse one of the 5 pillars and causing a domino effect, collapsing the entire structure. To fix this we could have used different tools like the ruler, etc. to have cut equal size pillars.
3. to better our structure we could have created more supports, which in this case the more supports the less likely the structure would be to collapse. A better central support would have also been a positive, allowing for most of the weight to focus in one spot with the other pillars aiding the central pillar. To do all this we could have used more paper, and tape to strengthen the pillars.
4. The techniques which people used in stacking the books varied, and it would be interesting to see if there is a certain technique which would be the best.
Nick F, Neal Patel, Neal Parihk, Matt P
1.We were playing around with the paper and came across the idea of folding the paper several times down the page letter style and then folding those pages into even folds again down the short side. We continued forth with this idea because at the time we believed that it was the best way to support the books.
ReplyDelete2.Our supports failed because we had uneven fold and one side of our design was weaker than the other. This is because the folds on that side were not at tight as the other side's. All of out designs failed once 6 textbooks were on top of them.
3.We could have improved our design by having several smaller supports similar to our larger one rather than the one alone. This would have distributed the weight from the textbooks more evenly and they wouldn't tip from side to side.
4.Yes, we observed that the more folds we made in an accordion style the stronger the design was. Also that when the books crushed the design, the design fell to a side and flattened rather than being crushed as a whole.
Krupa Patel, Mike Dolan, Bernard Lee, Steven Brower
Chris, Tyler and Bryan
ReplyDelete1) we chose to make our support folded rectangle because we thought that the folds would make the paper stronger.
2) This support failed because it didn't have enough points of contact with the text book.
3) We could have improved our design by making more folds in the paper.
4) We noticed that the more points that the supports made cpntact with the textbook the more the weight would be distributed, making the supports stronger.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete